Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Summons arrived
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Dappy_Cow
Hi Guys,

I got caught speeding 52 in a 30 by a radar gun in June. The Summons arrived today.

I dont deny i was speeding and intend to plead guilty by post.

However there is an issue i need some advice on -

Shortly after i was caught an article in the local paper appeared regarding the same stretch of road. It had recently changed from a 40 to the 30, but the council had not completed the traffic order properly until the middle of June, more than a week after i (and many others i suspect) where caught. The council apparently agreed that this meant many fines were wrong, although the police disputed this.

Now should i get a copy of the order and put it in the mitigating circumstances or not? I dont know the law on this or where i stand. There is a big difference if it was legally still a 40 as i'd have got a FPN and not be looking at a possible ban. However i dont want to look like im trying to make excuses if that will look worse for me from the Magistrates point of veiw.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Steph
Dappy_Cow
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - June 2011
Date of the NIP: - 0 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 0 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A5130 Broughton
Was the NIP addressed to you? -
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? -
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 0
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - Caught doing 52 in a 30 by Police with Radar gun. Stopped at the time. Road had changed from a 40 a few weeks before and had been closed in the mean time.

NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - Yes
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:46:40 +0000
AFCNEAL
Have you neen offered a fixed penalty? Presumably you've been summonsed? If so, you should attend and tkae the TRO with you (if the limit was indeed 40 at the time) and claim you were in the range for the FPN which the mags will rule as £60 and 3 points.
The Rookie
I'm not sure I agree, if the 30 limit wasn't legal and there were no signs saying 40 then either 1/ There was no speed limit (and argument often used at appeals for conveniance) or 2/ the limit was the NSL (60 for a single), either way you were NOT speeding.

I would plead not guilty to speeding, admit you were doing 52 and put the prostitution to strict proof the limit was lower than 60 with matching correct TRO's and signs, something (from what you say) they can't do.

Not identical but an example worth reading (besides its a bit of a giggle to read) Martin V Harrow crown court

Simon
Logician
I agree with Simon, pleading not guilty is the way to go. If you return the form indicating a NG plea a date will be set for the first hearing. At the first hearing you will be asked the basis of your defence. You then state that you have been charged with exceeding a 30mph limit, but that limit was not lawfully imposed until June 17, which was after the date of the alleged offence. You cannot therefore be guilty of the offence charged. If the prosecution seek to amend the charge to exceeding a 40mph limit, you point out that there were no signs indicating a 40mph limit which are legally required, so that is unenforceable, and you are NG. As in the Martin case, avoid answering the question what you thought the limit to be, that is not relevant.

We can help you draft a statement you can read out if you are uncertain about all this. I think the chances are at that stage the CPS will give up the case, as long as they have a prosecutor on it who is bright enought to understand the legal point.

Note: putting the prosecution to strict proof is now regarded as not complying with the criminal procedure rules.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Logician @ Thu, 11 Aug 2011 - 23:43) *
Note: putting the prosecution to strict proof is now regarded as not complying with the criminal procedure rules.


I don't think it's gone quite that far yet, though it's getting there. The defendant is now expected to tell the court and the prosecution the basis of their defence in order to comply with the CPR. The defendant can still put the prosecution to proof - the court can't simply enter a guilty plea for not saying, after all!
Logician
No, you are right, "strict proof" is obviously OK as long as it is specified what aspect of the case is concerned, as Simon was in fact suggesting. What you cannot do is just say the prosecution is put to strict proof over every aspect, as per LJ Leveson in Balogun v DPP:

In the absence of evidence it would be wrong to criticise the way the applicant conducted the pre-trial hearing, and I do not do so, specifically as it is recorded that there was an issue unspecified concerning the taking of the blood samples and its analysis. For my part, however, I do not accept that the spirit or letter of the Criminal Procedure Rules is complied with by asserting that the Crown is put to "strict proof", in the absence of detail, so as to ensure precisely which witnesses should be brought to court because there are substantial or real challenges to their evidence rather than because of a desire to call witnesses to attend to see what might emerge and in the vague hope that some defence might appear or some failure might manifest itself in an unjust acquittal.
johnjo42
Agreed. Although there is not yet a strict requirement for the defence to serve a defence statement in Magistrates' Courts it is getting more and more towards it. In some areas the CPS don't read the file until very shortly before the trial so it makes sense to tell them the nature of the defence (e.g. I put the Prosecution to proof that the road in question was governed by a 30 mph limit) at an early stage. This means that they can't say that they've had insufficient time to prepare their case or have been taken by surprise.
JJ
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.